planetf1.com

1st, 3rd & 6th

They must be laughing, Mclaren not so much...

Battle Far wrote:1st, 3rd & 5th

They must be laughing, Mclaren not so much...

You think todays race results were down to the engines?

Of course not, it was a lottery

but it's still funny as hell

McLaren are performing better without Honda too. Both sides appear very happy with how they currently stand

First time 2 different cars powered by Honda on the podium since 1988 Senna and Piquet, wow.

On the other hand, two Renaults blew up today. That's not a lottery. Two Ferraris failed in Qualifying. That's not a lottery.

SPA/Monza upgrade will be crucial. If they have really good next 6-9 months. Then RBRH are going to fight for the title next year. At Silverstone Albon missed at the end to score points and here Gasly crashed otherwise it would have been perfect race for them

McLaren should have stayed the course with Honda but they did the H a huge favor by dumping them.

This is the reality for McLaren now. Second rate chassis, second rate engine

Wins and podiums with redbull
And podium and before Germany a best 4th place with Torro Rosso, (a midfield team) since 2018.
I am sure they are not looking back.
And what a mastersroke by Redbull to take on Honda when nobody wanted them sacrificing STR and giving up sainz. What's the saying, one man's rubbish is another's treasure?. I don't think they were this strong at power circuits in the hybrid era.

Red Bull is winning despite of Honda, not because of Honda. With a Ferrari or Mercedes engine, Verstappen would be in a real fight for the wdc ...

Honda_PD wrote:McLaren should have stayed the course with Honda but they did the H a huge favor by dumping them.

This is the reality for McLaren now. Second rate chassis, second rate engine

McLaren are the most improved team on the grid this year. I think they're pretty positive. They have the right engineers for the job and are so happy with their drivers they confirmed them super early for next year

McLaren-Honda didn't work for either side. They're both much better off without each other

Honda_PD wrote:McLaren should have stayed the course with Honda but they did the H a huge favor by dumping them.

This is the reality for McLaren now. Second rate chassis, second rate engine

I agree. But there seemed to be a process/culture issue with McLaren Honda relationship. But yes, the chitty chitty bang bang Renault engine is going to limit McLaren's potential. Ron might have been right about winning a WCC with a customer engine.

Battle Far wrote:1st, 3rd & 6th

They must be laughing, Mclaren not so much...

Mclaren do not care, since the time when Alo called it a GP2 engine, it was really like a gp2 eninge, even worse(reliability)

Paolo_Lasardi wrote:Red Bull is winning despite of Honda, not because of Honda. With a Ferrari or Mercedes engine, Verstappen would be in a real fight for the wdc ...

Not 100% sure. Honda has reportedly a very tight packaging, suits the Newey design of size zero cars, it was one of the things I remember being mentioned back then. So it seems like they compliment each other, not sure how the other engines would fare with the aero that Newey wanted

Battle Far wrote:1st, 3rd & 6th

They must be laughing, Mclaren not so much...

So the Honda powered cars do much better when engine power as far less of a factor than normal....

Is this a great day for Honda?

mikeyg123 wrote:

Battle Far wrote:1st, 3rd & 6th

They must be laughing, Mclaren not so much...

So the Honda powered cars do much better when engine power as far less of a factor than normal....

Is this a great day for Honda?

Honestly Austria is an engine track with long straights and RedBull was fastest car there in race so I really doubt Honda engine is under powered.

Mayox wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

Battle Far wrote:1st, 3rd & 6th

They must be laughing, Mclaren not so much...

So the Honda powered cars do much better when engine power as far less of a factor than normal....

Is this a great day for Honda?

Honestly Austria is an engine track with long straights and RedBull was fastest car there in race so I really doubt Honda engine is under powered.

Sure, that was a day that could be billed as great for Honda.

mikeyg123 wrote:

Battle Far wrote:1st, 3rd & 6th

They must be laughing, Mclaren not so much...

So the Honda powered cars do much better when engine power as far less of a factor than normal....

Is this a great day for Honda?

Mercedes-Benz came to their home track intent on putting on an exhibition. Bottas was driving for his job. Party mode is usually the Mercedes' engine's hot app. Still, Verstappen split the Mercedes-Benz drivers in qualifying. The Honda engines aren't all that bad. I'd say that McLaren's chassis was probably worse than Honda's engine all along.

Todd wrote:I'd say that McLaren's chassis was probably worse than Honda's engine all along.

I think they both sucked

Todd wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

Battle Far wrote:1st, 3rd & 6th

They must be laughing, Mclaren not so much...

So the Honda powered cars do much better when engine power as far less of a factor than normal....

Is this a great day for Honda?

Mercedes-Benz came to their home track intent on putting on an exhibition. Bottas was driving for his job. Party mode is usually the Mercedes' engine's hot app. Still, Verstappen split the Mercedes-Benz drivers in qualifying. The Honda engines aren't all that bad. I'd say that McLaren's chassis was probably worse than Honda's engine all along.

Not a chance. It wasn't the Mclaren chassis that was woefully unreliable.

mikeyg123 wrote:

Todd wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

Battle Far wrote:1st, 3rd & 6th

They must be laughing, Mclaren not so much...

So the Honda powered cars do much better when engine power as far less of a factor than normal....

Is this a great day for Honda?

Mercedes-Benz came to their home track intent on putting on an exhibition. Bottas was driving for his job. Party mode is usually the Mercedes' engine's hot app. Still, Verstappen split the Mercedes-Benz drivers in qualifying. The Honda engines aren't all that bad. I'd say that McLaren's chassis was probably worse than Honda's engine all along.

Not a chance. It wasn't the Mclaren chassis that was woefully unreliable.

A badly designed chassis creates cooling issues, places stresses on engine blocks that they weren't designed for, and transmits surface irregularities into electronic and mechanical components that they can't survive.

Todd wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

Todd wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

Battle Far wrote:1st, 3rd & 6th

They must be laughing, Mclaren not so much...

So the Honda powered cars do much better when engine power as far less of a factor than normal....

Is this a great day for Honda?

Mercedes-Benz came to their home track intent on putting on an exhibition. Bottas was driving for his job. Party mode is usually the Mercedes' engine's hot app. Still, Verstappen split the Mercedes-Benz drivers in qualifying. The Honda engines aren't all that bad. I'd say that McLaren's chassis was probably worse than Honda's engine all along.

Not a chance. It wasn't the Mclaren chassis that was woefully unreliable.

A badly designed chassis creates cooling issues, places stresses on engine blocks that they weren't designed for, and transmits surface irregularities into electronic and mechanical components that they can't survive.

But they literally were designed for it. Or at least should have been. Mclaren have been more reliable with the off the shelf Renault.

mikeyg123 wrote:

Todd wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

Battle Far wrote:1st, 3rd & 6th

Mercedes-Benz came to their home track intent on putting on an exhibition. Bottas was driving for his job. Party mode is usually the Mercedes' engine's hot app. Still, Verstappen split the Mercedes-Benz drivers in qualifying. The Honda engines aren't all that bad. I'd say that McLaren's chassis was probably worse than Honda's engine all along.

Not a chance. It wasn't the Mclaren chassis that was woefully unreliable.

A badly designed chassis creates cooling issues, places stresses on engine blocks that they weren't designed for, and transmits surface irregularities into electronic and mechanical components that they can't survive.

But they literally were designed for it. Or at least should have been. Mclaren have been more reliable with the off the shelf Renault.

And Honda was more reliable with STRs last year that were adapted to accommodate Honda componentry. I'm not saying Honda hasn't improved since they left McLaren, but they were scapegoats for a team that had been stinking up the sport for a while before they got there and who continued for a while after they left. Even when they had Mercedes power, they were the worst Mercedes-powered chassis at the start of the season. They had far more money and resources to spend on development during the season than Force India, but that's the only reason they could compete.

Todd wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

Todd wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

Battle Far wrote:1st, 3rd & 6th

Mercedes-Benz came to their home track intent on putting on an exhibition. Bottas was driving for his job. Party mode is usually the Mercedes' engine's hot app. Still, Verstappen split the Mercedes-Benz drivers in qualifying. The Honda engines aren't all that bad. I'd say that McLaren's chassis was probably worse than Honda's engine all along.

Not a chance. It wasn't the Mclaren chassis that was woefully unreliable.

A badly designed chassis creates cooling issues, places stresses on engine blocks that they weren't designed for, and transmits surface irregularities into electronic and mechanical components that they can't survive.

But they literally were designed for it. Or at least should have been. Mclaren have been more reliable with the off the shelf Renault.

And Honda was more reliable with STRs last year that were adapted to accommodate Honda componentry. I'm not saying Honda hasn't improved since they left McLaren, but they were scapegoats for a team that had been stinking up the sport for a while before they got there and who continued for a while after they left. Even when they had Mercedes power, they were the worst Mercedes-powered chassis at the start of the season. They had far more money and resources to spend on development during the season than Force India, but that's the only reason they could compete.

Worst Merc chassis at the start of the season? They started with a double podium.

Mclaren obviously never had a top chassis but I don't think you can give Honda a free pass. Mclaren were doing a very average job. Honda were doing a bad one.

Siao7 wrote:

Paolo_Lasardi wrote:Red Bull is winning despite of Honda, not because of Honda. With a Ferrari or Mercedes engine, Verstappen would be in a real fight for the wdc ...

Not 100% sure. Honda has reportedly a very tight packaging, suits the Newey design of size zero cars, it was one of the things I remember being mentioned back then. So it seems like they compliment each other, not sure how the other engines would fare with the aero that Newey wanted

Wasn't the tight packaging something that McLaren requested?

JamWalsh wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

Paolo_Lasardi wrote:Red Bull is winning despite of Honda, not because of Honda. With a Ferrari or Mercedes engine, Verstappen would be in a real fight for the wdc ...

Not 100% sure. Honda has reportedly a very tight packaging, suits the Newey design of size zero cars, it was one of the things I remember being mentioned back then. So it seems like they compliment each other, not sure how the other engines would fare with the aero that Newey wanted

Wasn't the tight packaging something that McLaren requested?

Possibly. But it is a philosophy that ties up with the RB if they can fit everything in a slim design

mikeyg123 wrote:

Todd wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

Battle Far wrote:

A badly designed chassis creates cooling issues, places stresses on engine blocks that they weren't designed for, and transmits surface irregularities into electronic and mechanical components that they can't survive.

But they literally were designed for it. Or at least should have been. Mclaren have been more reliable with the off the shelf Renault.

And Honda was more reliable with STRs last year that were adapted to accommodate Honda componentry. I'm not saying Honda hasn't improved since they left McLaren, but they were scapegoats for a team that had been stinking up the sport for a while before they got there and who continued for a while after they left. Even when they had Mercedes power, they were the worst Mercedes-powered chassis at the start of the season. They had far more money and resources to spend on development during the season than Force India, but that's the only reason they could compete.

Worst Merc chassis at the start of the season? They started with a double podium.

Mclaren obviously never had a top chassis but I don't think you can give Honda a free pass. Mclaren were doing a very average job. Honda were doing a bad one.

I was wrong about the timing of their weakness in 2014, but they still accomplished very little for a team with their budget and the dominant power unit. I realize that calling someone who is completely pathetic average would be considered the height of insensitivity today, but average is supposed to mean sharing quality with the largest plurality(mode) or in the middle of quality(mean) McLaren went several years without achieving either definition, only half of them with Honda.

Todd wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

Todd wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

Battle Far wrote:

A badly designed chassis creates cooling issues, places stresses on engine blocks that they weren't designed for, and transmits surface irregularities into electronic and mechanical components that they can't survive.

But they literally were designed for it. Or at least should have been. Mclaren have been more reliable with the off the shelf Renault.

And Honda was more reliable with STRs last year that were adapted to accommodate Honda componentry. I'm not saying Honda hasn't improved since they left McLaren, but they were scapegoats for a team that had been stinking up the sport for a while before they got there and who continued for a while after they left. Even when they had Mercedes power, they were the worst Mercedes-powered chassis at the start of the season. They had far more money and resources to spend on development during the season than Force India, but that's the only reason they could compete.

Worst Merc chassis at the start of the season? They started with a double podium.

Mclaren obviously never had a top chassis but I don't think you can give Honda a free pass. Mclaren were doing a very average job. Honda were doing a bad one.

I was wrong about the timing of their weakness in 2014, but they still accomplished very little for a team with their budget and the dominant power unit. I realize that calling someone who is completely pathetic average would be considered the height of insensitivity today, but average is supposed to mean sharing quality with the largest plurality(mode) or in the middle of quality(mean) McLaren went several years without achieving either definition, only half of them with Honda.

they were 5th of 11 in 2014.... Average would be about right.

https://www.planetf1.com/news/honda-tak ... -gp2-wins/

lol GP2 wins in 2019. I think it would be huge for them if Max can win the title next year. It is a win win situation. They have to go for it this year and hopefully next year they will have the reliability and performance as well.

Honda_PD wrote:McLaren should have stayed the course with Honda but they did the H a huge favor by dumping them.

This is the reality for McLaren now. Second rate chassis, second rate engine

Renault have made huge progress this year. I think it is around 50bhp. In race I do not think there is too much difference now between all 4 manufacture and next year I guess they will probably converge even more. Having said that their car is still pathetic. Literally no improvement at all for years now. I can't see Mclaren as well closing to top teams. These guys are firm midfielders and have admitted they do not have the money or resources to compete with top teams

I think McLaren will eventually build their own engines. Might be 10, 20 years but they will eventually want to be in total control of their design like Ferrari and Mercedes are.

pendulumeffect wrote:I think McLaren will eventually build their own engines. Might be 10, 20 years but they will eventually want to be in total control of their design like Ferrari and Mercedes are.

I remember talks about this since forever. Engines are a tremendously difficult thing to build, especially these hybrid ones, the R&D, testing, etc. I mean if there's one team apart from RB that can do it, it's them, but why would they? Far less money to spend if they just buy the engines.

The only thing I'll say is that Honda did a great job this year. They may still lack something in qualifying but in the races they are right there with Merc and Ferrari imo. What is even more amazing to me is how reliable the Honda PU is,it is miles ahead of the Renault in that regard. All signs point to next year they will have a PU equal to the top two. It is also the best sounding engine by far imo.

mikeyg123 wrote:

Todd wrote:

Todd wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

Battle Far wrote:

A badly designed chassis creates cooling issues, places stresses on engine blocks that they weren't designed for, and transmits surface irregularities into electronic and mechanical components that they can't survive.

And Honda was more reliable with STRs last year that were adapted to accommodate Honda componentry. I'm not saying Honda hasn't improved since they left McLaren, but they were scapegoats for a team that had been stinking up the sport for a while before they got there and who continued for a while after they left. Even when they had Mercedes power, they were the worst Mercedes-powered chassis at the start of the season. They had far more money and resources to spend on development during the season than Force India, but that's the only reason they could compete.

Worst Merc chassis at the start of the season? They started with a double podium.

Mclaren obviously never had a top chassis but I don't think you can give Honda a free pass. Mclaren were doing a very average job. Honda were doing a bad one.

I was wrong about the timing of their weakness in 2014, but they still accomplished very little for a team with their budget and the dominant power unit. I realize that calling someone who is completely pathetic average would be considered the height of insensitivity today, but average is supposed to mean sharing quality with the largest plurality(mode) or in the middle of quality(mean) McLaren went several years without achieving either definition, only half of them with Honda.

they were 5th of 11 in 2014.... Average would be about right.

5th with the dominant power unit and a big budget is not average. Average in this instance would have been third. Second would have been good.

Todd wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

Todd wrote:

Todd wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:


And Honda was more reliable with STRs last year that were adapted to accommodate Honda componentry. I'm not saying Honda hasn't improved since they left McLaren, but they were scapegoats for a team that had been stinking up the sport for a while before they got there and who continued for a while after they left. Even when they had Mercedes power, they were the worst Mercedes-powered chassis at the start of the season. They had far more money and resources to spend on development during the season than Force India, but that's the only reason they could compete.

Worst Merc chassis at the start of the season? They started with a double podium.

Mclaren obviously never had a top chassis but I don't think you can give Honda a free pass. Mclaren were doing a very average job. Honda were doing a bad one.

I was wrong about the timing of their weakness in 2014, but they still accomplished very little for a team with their budget and the dominant power unit. I realize that calling someone who is completely pathetic average would be considered the height of insensitivity today, but average is supposed to mean sharing quality with the largest plurality(mode) or in the middle of quality(mean) McLaren went several years without achieving either definition, only half of them with Honda.

they were 5th of 11 in 2014.... Average would be about right.

5th with the dominant power unit and a big budget is not average. Average in this instance would have been third. Second would have been good.

Ok so slightly below average chassis I can go with that. Then Honda came along with the worst engine. I'm not arguing Mclaren were doing a great job but I do think its false to say they were doing a worse job than Honda.

Alonso isn't an F1 driver any more - isn't it about time that Honda just let it go..

I'm glad both McLaren and Honda are doing better after the much needed split, but jeez.